House Standing Committee on Economic Development & Technology

Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the Committee on Economic Development and Technology. Today's date is Wednesday, March 19, 2025, and the time is 10:05. We are here at Conference Room 423 at the State Capitol. And before we start at the top of our agenda with testimony, please bear with me as I read out our disclosures.

If you are disconnected unexpectedly, you may attempt to rejoin the meeting. If disconnected while presenting testimony, you may be allowed to continue if time permits. Please note that the House is not responsible for any bad Internet connections on the testifier's end.

In the event of network failure, it may be necessary to reschedule the hearing or schedule a meeting for decision-making. In that case, an appropriate notice will be posted. Please avoid any trademark or copyrighted images and please refrain from profanity or uncivil behavior. Such behavior may be grounds for removal from the hearing without the ability to rejoin.

Thank you, and now we are going to start with testimony on SB 338. Our first testifier is the Department of Taxation with comments.

Aloha, chair, vice chair, and members. Department of Taxation will stand on our testimony with comments.

Thank you. Our next testifier is Tax Foundation of Hawaii with comments in Zoom.

Aloha and good morning, chair and members of the committee. This is Joy Dillon, on behalf of the Tax Foundation of Hawaii. We have also submitted some comments on the measure. We'll stand on our written comments. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next testifier is Servpac, in support.

Good morning, chair, vice chair, members of the committee. Myungo, here on behalf of Servpac. We stand on our written testimony in support. Available for any questions.

Thank you. That's all our testifiers willing to testify. Is there anyone in person that I have not called? Any in Zoom? With no testifiers, any comments or questions, members? Let's move on to our next item: SB 558. Our first testifier is the Hawaii Department of Agriculture, in support. All right. No one.

In Department of Ag, we have Ulupono Initiative in support.

Morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Members, Michael Munakata here on behalf of the Ulupono Initiative, we stand on our testimony in strong support of this measure. You know, finding ways to really help our farmers make money. You know, I think that's what we're trying to do here, trying to take it to the next level.

We'd like to see our farmers and agriculture become an economic powerhouse for our state. And I think this measure looks to do just that by allowing options for farmers to find ways to bring their product and process it and extend their value in a way that they haven't been able to before.

I think that that's what this fpins program looks to do. Again, we really appreciate you folks moving this forward and thank you.

Thank you. Moving on to our next testifier, we have local food coalition in support.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, [unintelligible] here on behalf of the local food coalition, we stand on our written testimony in support. Echoing the commentary from Ulupono. It does drive the catalyst for interaction in the network for food producers, livestock agriculture and within the network for food production. Thank you.

Thank you. Hawaii Food Industry Association in support. Hawaii Farm Bureau in support. There any other testifiers in the room? ADC.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Member of the Committee, I'm Wendy Gady with the Agribusiness Development Corp. And what this bill is is it is economic equity. It is about rural jobs, it's about rural businesses, and it's about basically using the 40% of our product that isn't so pretty.

That's the stuff that doesn't go to market, it gets plowed under. But that is food that can go into our food system and that's what this bill is all about. If you have any questions, I'm here to answer.

Thank you. DB.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Member Templo. Did we, did you get our copy of the written testimony?

We did get it. Okay. Just want to make sure that you are speaking.

Okay. Sorry about that. We do have proposed amendments in there in Section two. We're proposing language to be a little bit more flexible on the neighbor island.

So ADC currently has lands on Oahu and Kauai and we are specific on where we're going to site the manufacturing facilities in those two counties for the County of Maui and the County of Hawaii. We're having discussions on where we're going to acquire assets and, and then we can put these manufacturing facilities.

This is phase two of the innovation facilities that Leeward Community College and the community college systems are implementing. So we're taking idea to concept and as you heard earlier from us, testifiers, we're trying to find solutions for the farmers that 40% of their off grades don't have a market to.

So this not only helps with those anchoring those small businesses, the farmers, but also helping us to get to exports with these manufacturing facilities.

We ask for your support and your consideration under two amendment section two, the flexibility for the neighbor islands of citing the manufacturing facilities and Section 5, the funding allocations which is outlined in our testimony. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Is there any other testimonies, any in Zoom Members, any questions? I have a question for DBAD with The testimony you have an amendment for the foreign trade zone facility in Hilo on the island of Hawaii. When I spoke with the foreign trade zone, they had a plan for some sort of testing area.

Does this conflict with what their original plan is or is it the same thing?

It's not the same and it doesn't conflict. What the foreign trade zone is doing is they've received a federal appropriation to do an ag tech facility and within their statutory powers, they're allowed to bring in international equipment that necessarily the farmers don't get to access.

So within their designated foreign trade zone area, agribusiness will allow will be able to come on site, test certain equipment, and then FTZ can be that conduit to those international equipment providers on what equipment may be suitable for the state and their production and maybe what adjustments have to be.

So they're looking at a couple things in the ag tech area that's not necessarily similar or conflicting with the Food and Product Innovation Network. This network is a system modeled after some of our Asia Pacific countries, New Zealand, Singapore, Australia and Korea.

And this would actually allow us to enter into a global agreement too, if we can establish our own food and Product innovation network.

This language is it. So we're replacing some existing partner location. Does this hold us to these sites if these were enacted, or do we want some flexibility and not name them and also pursue other site location that might be a possibility in the future.

So for Oahu and Kauai, we've already selected the sites for Oahu, planning is already being done by the University of Hawaii Community Design Center. For the neighbor islands, we haven't had any specific site determined as of now.

ADC doesn't have land on Maui and the 2 acres or less they do have on the Big Island Hilo, it's not suitable for this. We're not looking at doing this facility there. It's going to have to be regionally where it makes sense.

So we'd be open to working with the district legislators in those counties on what makes sense suitable for their rural communities and providing these facilities.

So by having this in this bill, will that limit us to explore other regional sites?

No, I believe the flexibility is broad enough for specifically Hawaii island and the County of Maui, which includes Maui and Molokai. We haven't been any site specific, so we could still be looking at next session where to acquire land and then to start the proof of concept planning for these facilities. Big Island's going to need two.

It's going to need a West Hawaii and An East Hawaii.

Well, thank you for your work on this. Thank you, Chair. Go ahead, Dean.

So I echo the Chair's questions about the specificity. Excuse me, the specificity in this proposed language. I also have another concern, which is simply the, you know, hate to go all Legalese on the group, but, you know, the Constitution requires General language in legislation and sort of frowns upon overly specific designations of Kekaha versus et cetera.

And so I'm wondering if there's a way of rewriting this so that the language is more General so we can comply with that constitutional requirement.

We'll take a look at that, too. Thank you. And work on that with you folks. Thank you.

All right, any further questions? No questions. Let's move on to our next Item. We have SB 1186. Our first testifier is the State of Hawaii Office of Planning and Sustainable Development in support.

Aloha. Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. My name is Danielle Bass, State Sustainability Coordinator from the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development. We would like to stand on our testimony in strong support of this measure. We've been an active participant in this working group, and we want to see this work continue.

And we do support the position that is provided in the bill. And we do actually recommend that that position funding continue for two years for the full biennium. Thank you. I'm available for any questions.

Thank you. Moving on to our next testifier. We have the Hawaii Department of Agriculture in support. I guess they don't really like their bills. Ulupono Initiative in support.

Hawaii Food Industry Association in support. Next is Hawaii Farm Bureau in support.

Thank you, Chair. Vice Chair, members of the committee. Brian Miyamoto here on behalf of the Hawaii Farm Bureau. My apologies, Chair, for missing the first bill. We do have a concurrent ag committee hearing and Department of Ag is there. There's several of them down there, so they send their apologies. Also, we're in support of this measure.

And if I may, I know it's not protocol Chair, I did want to testify on the previous bill. And from the discussion, if the Chair would consider in regards to the specificity of the locations of sites, maybe.

I'm sorry, Brian, but we're going to -

Okay, I apologize, Chair. Just try not to - we support this measure. Again, we did have some concerns. We see some of those concerns were addressed. There is a position there. It would require position. We just want some clarity on the organization of the working group. There are no members named.

If it is, the ADC Board is going to do it, then we'd like that articulated and also some of the reportability of the working group and the team. But we are in strong support of this measure. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. We have Hawaii Public Health Institute in support.

Hello, Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. My name is Kawika Kahiapo with Hawaii Public Health Institute and Hawaii Farm to School Network. We are in strong support of this bill. We believe that one of the - we believe that having communications within the different interjacencies would be a positive for collaboration and making sure that we able to streamline productions for food systems here in Hawaii. Thank you for the opportunity.

Thank you. Is there any others in person wishing to testify? Go ahead DBEDT.

Apologies again if we didn't check in person. DBEDT stands on its testimony and support and we do ask for the support of the position for fiscal year 26 and fiscal year 27 funding.

Thank you. ADC.

I apologize, Chair. We submitted testimony. I think it came in late. And we stand in - I'm Wendy Gady with Agribusiness Development Corp, and we stand in strong support. One of the things that's in our statute is we were created 30 years ago for the economic, environmental, and social benefit of the people of Hawaii.

And this bill definitely fits within our statute. We're here with any questions. But strong support.

Thank you. Proceed.

Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee, my name is Amanda Shaw, Director of Food Systems at Oahu RC&D: Resource Conservation Development Council. We've been working with the Department of Ag to stand up this program.

And this is something we've been fighting for quite a while the last several years to get coordinated efforts so that we don't disperse our investments in the food system as it stands now. There's a lot of amazing initiatives out there, but we're not all coordinated. We're not all working together.

There's been a great precedent based on SCR 111 that happened last fall. That was a resolution that brought together many departments to coordinate, and we've seen some of them here today in support. So, we're just grateful for your consideration. Mahalo.

Thank you. Any others? Proceed.

Aloha. My name is Angelina Woo, and I am a part of the Hawaii Food Council. We stand in strong support of Senate Bill 1186, and I'd like to highlight some parts of our written testimony. First and foremost, we believe that food is a right.

And in addition, food security is a right, which is something my generation hasn't really been able to see. And we believe that this interagency coordination team would allow for the different parts of the Hawaii state government to work together to actually solve this issue.

We're grateful that we were able to pass multiple farm to school bills this past legislative session. But the DOE is struggling to find solutions on its own and we're struggling to meet that 30% by 2030 goal.

And we believe that this interagency coordination team and working group would allow us to make better progress and to move the benefits of farm to school to all of Hawaii, as we would like our hana to share some of the same benefits and support from the government that we are. Mahalo.

Thank you. Any others in person? Any in zoom? All right, with no other testimony, any questions? Members, let's move on to the next item. We have SB 328. Our first testimony is...I'm guessing the Department of Agriculture is not here. The Department of Taxation with comments.

Chair and Vice Chair; Department of Taxation stands on our written comments. Thank you.

Thank you. We have Hawaii Farm Bureau in support.

Thank you, Chair, Vice Chair, members of the c1ommittee, Brian Miyamoto here on behalf of the Hawaii Farm Bureau. You have a written testimony in support. You heard previous testifier talk about farm to school. We're here a lot about farm to school, about doubling our food production. This speaks to that.

We have one active dairy left on Hawaii island in Hawi, but we have some infrastructure that, that we could repurpose and we're trying to rebuild and revive our hog industry. We still have hog farmers and pig farmers here; and again, that's something that can contribute to the farm to school, to achieving our 30 by 30.

So, we're in support of this effort. We want to support our livestock industry, and this goes a long way. Instead of building from the ground up, why not take a similar facility dairy, not the same, but an animal facility and rebuild it up and now make it an active hog farm.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. We have the Tax Foundation of Hawaii with comments in zoom.

Yes, good morning. This is Jade McMillan on behalf of the Tax Foundation of Hawaii. Our comments, we've submitted comments on the measure, within our comments, we've noted that this appears to be a narrow industry incentive that may benefit specific taxpayer.

If so, the law would be unfair to other taxpayers, especially though that may be in competition with the taxpayers seeking this benefit. We feel a direct appropriation for a grant or subsidy program would be more accountable and transparent. Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have any testifiers in person and any in zoom? With no further testimony, do we have any questions from our members? Let's move on to our next item.

I just have a real quick question for Farm Bureau: where is this proposed transfer going to take place from a dairy farm to a hog farm?

Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau; Vice Chair, thank you for the question. We're not we don't know any specific instance. We're not introduced to the bill again. We had I think back in the 90s, maybe 10 dairies. Slowly we've lost our dairy. So, there's this infrastructure.

Some may be looking at Big Island Dairy in Ookala, which is no longer dairy. There is a leaseholder that holds the lease not wanting to have dairy operations. I believe there are grazing some cattle. Vice Chair, we don't know specifically.

We know I think some people may have been looking at that facility as one of the newer facilities that has newer equipment and infrastructure. We don't there is no certain we haven't been told as far as a farm bill. We just think that's a good idea.

And if the community of Ookala and Hawaii Island would like to see a hog farm, then absolutely. Our - most of our hog farms currently our production commercial hog farms are located here on Oahu.

There is a dairy, naked cow dairy that is no longer in operation in Waianae and that may be one of the facilities that can be looked at to convert because we do have production hog farms on Oahu.

Thank you.

Of course. Let's move on to our next item, which is going to be SB 890, and our first specifier is Hawaii Farm Bureau.

Thank you, Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. Brian Miyamoto, on behalf of the Hawaii Farm Bureau will stand on a written testimony and support.

Is there any other testimony in person? Any in zoom? Brian, can you come up? So, what are we doing here?

Thank you, Chair. Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau; thank you for the question. Chair. I think what they're doing is they're trying to be proactive, are a little proactive. We've come before the legislature about coffee labeling, macadamia labeling, even mamaki tea labeling.

So, they're trying to protect integrity of this product of a staple of Hawaii by what it appears to be a labeling a push for labeling law. The original version of bill was somewhat problematic. It has gone through committees and been amended and it's getting a little bit better.

If you do see our testimonials hoping others whoever introduced the bill was here. We support the intent. The law, it's been improved, but it's a little different. It's actually originally required anything, would have to be labeled poi, even if you're using other ingredients. You know, not just kalo; that's changed, it's been improved.

But this labeling bill seems to say that if it is 100% low local kalo, it has to say, it has to put it on the label. That's actually opposite from mac nut and coffee, where you cannot say that it's 100 - if you're not using 100% of the crop.

Now, we don't know any point miller manufacturer that wouldn't want to identify as 100%. But without enough of a runway to for the implementation, they may already have packaging that doesn't have that label and you're going to put an additional burden on them. So, our concerns are kind of the way the language is worded.

But ultimately, we support protecting our local crops and iconic crops, and that's why we're supporting the intent of the measure. Again, we're not the introducers of the measure, but we liken this to kona coffee, macadamia nut, mamaki tea, and any other local crop that - and local product that others, not from Hawaii, are trying to use and abuse using the Hawaii brand.

This one's a little bit different because it's a culturally relevant product. But again, we want to protect the integrity of our local crops.

Thank you. Let's move on to our next item, SB 742. We have Department of Labor Industrial Relations in support. All right. We have Office of Wellness and Resilience from the Office of the Governor in support. Executive Office on Early Learning and support.

Hi, Chair Ilagan, Vice Chair Hussy and members of the committee. I'm Yuuko Arikawa-Cross, Director of the Executive Office on Early Learning. We stand on our written testimony and support. Thank you.

Thank you. We have the University of Hawaii System with comments.

Good morning. Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee, Debora Halbert, Vice President for Academic Strategy. We stand in our written testimony. Happy to answer any questions you might have. Thank you so much.

Thank you. We have Hawaii Kids Can in support.

Thank you. We have the Hawaii Workforce Funders Collaborative in support.

Morning, Chair, Vice Chair and committee members. I'm Matt Stevens with the Hawaii Workforce Funders Collaborative and we stand on our testimony and strong support of this bill. We're making as a state major investment in workforce development. But right now, we don't have the data systems in place to measure the long-term outcomes that we need.

Without reliable real time data, we don't know and that limits our ability to strengthen our economy, and we cannot design these systems without multi agency data governance. Other states have already solved this problem.

Five years ago in a different role, I worked with the State of Colorado's Workforce Development Council on a similar cross sector data sharing initiative and saw firsthand how modernizing workforce data can transform economic planning.

By integrating employment and education data, Colorado was able to track which programs led to good jobs, adjust workforce strategies in real time, reduce administrative burdens and provide job seekers with real time information to make informed career decisions.

The main lesson I learned from my work with Colorado is that successful data sharing requires more than just agreements or technology. It requires dedicated staff to sustain collaboration across agencies.

No single department has the capacity to manage this work alone and that's why this working group is so important, because it would provide the structure needed to ensure that data sharing is not just a one-time effort but an ongoing strategy of our state that can strengthen our workforce and economic development.

We thank you for considering this bill and available to answer any questions. Thank you.

Moving on to our next testifier, Hawaii State Commission on the Status of Women in support.

Hi Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee; thank you for hearing this important bill. Llasmin Chaine for the State Commission on the Status of Women. I stand on my written testimony and strong support and offer an amendment recommendation for your consideration.

This bill is needed because it breaks down the current information silos between state agents and offers an opportunity for data infrastructure planning to address the state's affordability crisis.

I respectfully request that the commission be included as either a working group or an advisory group member so that we can ensure the developed data governance structure takes into account the economic and educational needs, efforts and opportunities of the girls and women across Hawaii.

I urge you to pass SB 742 and stand in support of increased data sharing and collaboration among state agencies, offices, commissions and community stakeholders to ensure our daughters don't feel forced to move to other states because they offer better opportunities and provisions than Hawaii. Thank you and I'm available for any questions.

Thank you. Do we have any others in person wishing to testify? Proceed.

Thank you. Any others? Do we have any in zoom. With no other testimony; members, any questions? I have one question with ETS. So, this working group allows different departments to have that cross communication and exchange of data. Will this working group also look into how to present that data that's public more easily to the public?

Yes. That should be part of this job as well. Because the recent challenge we faced is the federal government removed like thousands of data sets. Those are considered open data as well. Currently, our own open data are in different websites.

So this working group would be great to include that because open data is part of the data sharing.

So, this section on page 6H says, supports the creation of public facing and accessible dashboards. Is that's what's...that's what you had in mind?

Yes.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

Right. With no further questions and no testimonies, we will take a brief recess. Recess.

We are back from recess, and we are going to move on to decision making. We will start at SB 338. The Chair's recommendation is going to defect the effective date to the House defective effective date. Also going to make some technical amendments needed for clarity and consistency and style. We're going to move this out with an HD 1.

Members, any questions? Vice Chair, please take the vote.

Okay. SB 338 SD2; recommendation is to pass with amendments. [Roll Call].

Thank you very much. Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. We are now on SB 558, and the Chair's recommendation is going to adopt DBEDT's testimony and the amendments within that testimony; we also will defect the effective date to the House defect effective date. And I also want to mention that into the committee notes, for the appropriation amount, it will be 350k for the funding allocation.

Members, are there any questions?

Just a brief comment. Just want to make sure that we smooth out the specific language and make it general on the DBEDT.

All right, Vice Chair, please take the vote.

Okay. SB558 SD2 HD1; Chair and Vice Chair vote on aye. Any votes in opposition? Any votes with reservations? Chair, the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you, Vice Chair. We are now on SB 1186. The Chair's recommendation is going to add in three positions. We're going to have a blank amount in these positions. The first position is the food system specialist. Second is the policy analyst and the third is the administrative assistant.

We're going to add into the committee notes that the food system specialist will cost 120k, the policy analyst will cost 100k, and administration assistant is going to cost 60k.

We're also going to insert the membership from the working group from Senate Draft 1 and then further amend the working group membership by removing subparagraph four through eight and replacing it with co-chairs. We'll appoint five members with relevant experience and expertise to participate in the Interagency Food Systems Working Group.

We will also add in into the committee notes 100k for operating funds for the coordination team as well as for the working group that they will use that pot of money to operate. Any questions, members? All right, Vice Chair, please take the vote.

Okay. SB 1186 SD2 HD1; Chair and Vice Chair vote aye. Any votes in opposition? Any votes with reservations? Chair, the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Moving on to SB 328. Chair's recommendation is as is. Members, any questions? Vice Chair, please take the vote.

Okay. SB 328 SD1 HD1; recommendations to pass as is. Chair and Vice Chair vote aye. Any votes in opposition? Any votes with reservations? Chair, the recommendations adopted.

Thank you. Moving on to SB 890. The chair's recommendation is as is. Members, any questions? Vice Chair, please take the vote.

Okay. SB 890. Recommendations to pass unamended, as is. Chair and Vice Chair vote aye. Any votes in opposition? Any votes with reservation? Chair, the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Let's move on to our next item, SB 742. The Chair's recommendation is to add in the testimony from the Commission of Status of Women, going to also defect the date to the House defective effective date. We're going to add in technical amendments needed for clarity, consistency, and style. Members, any questions?

Vice Chair, please take the vote.

Okay. SB 742 SD2; recommendations to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair vote aye. Any votes in opposition? Any votes with reservation? Chair, the recommendations adopted.

We're going to go back to a previous measure, SB 1641. This is regarding the film commission and the Chair's recommendation is going to add in...we're going to amend to change the State of Hawaii Film Commission to the Hawaii Film Authority.

We will also amend to change the makeup of the board and bear with me as I make those recommendations. The authority shall consist of 12 members, 10 of whom shall be appointed and removed by the Governor, except for three of whom shall be ex official voting members as follows.

The Director of Business, Economic Development, Tourism or the director's designee shall serve as the chairperson of the authority. Second, the person of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs or the person's designee with experience in cultural appropriateness.

Third, one member from each county film office to serve on a rotating basis every two years, beginning with the Big Island Film Office, then Maui, then Oahu and finally Kauai.

Fourth, two members with labor representation in the local film industry selected by the Governor from a list of one name submitted by each of the labor unions to serve every two years.

Five, two members with representation in film production selected by the Governor from a list of one name submitted by the Motion Picture Association, one name by the Hawaii Film Festival or any Hawaii based nonprofit film organization in the state.

Six, one member from the Department of Education selected by the superintendent to promote the labor workforce within the film industry. One member of the University of Hawaii System selected by the president to promote the labor workforce within the film industry and the remaining three shall be ex official voting members as follows.

The chairperson of the Board of Land and Natural Resources or the chairperson's designee with expertise in permitting. One member selected by the president of the Senate and one member selected by the speaker of the House of Representatives.

We're also going to change to the House defective effective date going to make some amendments for technical amendments needed for clarity, consistency, and style. Members, any questions? Vice Chair, please take the vote.

Okay. SB 1641 SD2; recommendations to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair, vote aye. Any votes in opposition? Any votes with reservation? Chair, the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you, members. The committee is now adjourned.

Good morning, everyone. We are on a joint committee hearing with the Committee of Economic Development Technology as well as the Committee on Tourism. At this moment, it is Wednesday, March 19, 2025. We are also here at the Conference Room 423 at the State Capitol. The time is 10:51.

Bear with me as I read out the disclosure. If you are disconnected unexpectedly, you may attempt to rejoin the meeting. If disconnected while presenting testimony, you may be allowed to continue. If time permits, please note that the House is not responsible for any bad Internet connections on the testifier's end.

In the event of network failure, you may be necessary to reschedule the hearing or schedule a meeting for decision making. In that case, an appropriate notice will be posted. Please avoid any trademark or copyrighted images. Please refrain from profanity or uncivil behavior. Such behavior may be grounds for removal from the hearing without the ability to rejoin.

Thank you for hearing out this disclosure. We're going to start with testimony for SB 891. For first testimony...actually, bear with me. I just want to take a recess. Recess.

We are back from recess and moving on to testimonies. Our first testifier shall be from DBEDT with comments. Sir.

Good morning, Chairs and Vice Chairs. Eugene Tian. I'm the Economic Research Administrator with DBEDT. We stand on our written testimony providing comments. But I need to make, I want to make two points. One is we are very happy to support the working group by staffing.

But given that the two Chairs are in the legislature, it might be a little difficult for us to support given different working locations and different working schedule. And secondly, because this gaming will impact everybody in the state, and I think the legislature may want to enlarge the membership for this working group. Thank you.

Thank you. Moving on to the Nation of Hawaii in opposition.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, members. My name is Brandon Maka'awa'awa and I strongly urge you to reject SB 891; Hawaii's gaming policy must serve the people, not outside interests. This bill does not create a fair and well-regulated framework. Instead, it allows outside gaming corporations to influence policy without ensuring that the benefits stay in Hawaii.

Without proper oversight, the risks far outweigh any potential revenue. We have enough extractive economies here. We don't need another one. A strong regulatory framework foundation must come first. No other state has established gaming without a structured regulatory body. Every jurisdiction with legal gaming has an experience commission to oversee licensing, investigations, audits, compliance, and enforcement.

Hawaii currently lacks this foundation. Yet SB 891 moves forward without fully addressing these critical gaps. The Native Hawaiian voice must be central to the discussions. This bill includes a single Native Hawaiian representative, but that is not enough. Gaming will impact our community the most.

We should have a leading role in shaping policy, ensuring revenue supports, cultural preservation, education and local economies and job growth. A well-structured, community led approach is the only responsible path forward. For these reasons, I urge the committee to reject SB 891 SD2.

Gaming in Hawaii should not be dictated by outside interests, but by those interests who call this place home. Mahalo.

Thank you. Moving on to our next testifier, Hawaii Tourism Authority with comments.

Aloha Chairs and Vice Chairs. Daniel Nāhoʻopiʻi, Interim CEO and President of the Hawaii Tourism Authority. We stand on our written comments, particularly requesting to have a seat at the table since we know that gaming will impact the visitor industry.

We have the Nation of Hawaii in opposition.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. Strongly urge you to reject SB 891 SD2. Hawaii must take a responsible approach to gaming. This bill does not guarantee that gaming, if introduced, will serve the best interests of Hawaii. The current structure favors outside interests instead of local leadership.

If gaming moves forward, it must be built on transparency and real protections for our communities. By adding corporations that have self interest in crafting a policy for them, it will only shift those profits from the shareholders of Native Hawaii back to the mainland. Rushing ahead without a plan is a mistake.

Lawmakers and agencies have struggled to answer key regulatory questions. This shows Hawaii is not ready to oversee a gaming industry without fully understanding the risks and costs. Moving forward now will create gaps in regulation, enforcement, and oversight. Native Hawaiians must have a meaningful role. Gaming policy must respect the people and culture of Hawaii.

A single Native Hawaiian representative is not enough. Those most impacted by these decisions should have a leading voice in shaping the future. For these reasons, I urge the committee to reject SB 891 SD2. Thank you.

Thank you. Moving on to our next testifier, Aloha Halawa District partners in support.

Good morning. Good morning, Chair Ilagan and Tam, Vice Chairs Hussy and Templo. My name is Stanford Carr with a partner of Aloha Halawa District Partners. I'm here in strong support of SB 891 SD2. Aloha Halawa District Partners, also known as AHDP, has been selected as a preferred offer for the new Aloha Stadium entertainment district.

We humbly and respectfully request to have a seat at the table be a part of the working group.

This is a transformative project anchored by sports entertainment venues and we feel that in order to ensure that there's community discussions, we have been outreaching to the community with respect to the plans for our urban district and we'll be sure to have community's voice as part of the process.

Therefore, we respectfully ask for our participation on the working group board. Thank you.

Thank you. Move on to our next specifier. We have Stanford Car Development LLC in support. Let's move on to our next testifier. Dwayne Bautista in support.

Morning Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. My name is Dwayne Bautista. I'll be - I'm in full support of Senate Bill 891 Draft 2. We ask also to have to add or amend, to have labor on the - to be added to the working group.

And then also the reason why I want this bill to pass is, I mean, this working group is going to establish the policy, procedures, or whatever future that we have for this gaming that should be coming up.

And I feel it's real important that we have here the local people with, with the proper people in place as a working group to make sure that whatever revenues or whatever policy procedures, it will benefit Hawaii. Thank you for your time. Malaho.

Thank you. Is there any other testifiers in person wishing to testify? Proceed.

Hey, morning committee members, and Chair, Vice Chair. My name is Cody Sula, on behalf of the Iron Workers Stabilization Fund. We did submit written testimony. We'll stand on the written testimony with a few comments. We do ask for a proposed amendment to add a seat for a labor organization.

The reasons why is because our members will be performing the work. Also, we want to take a look and add a labor's perspective when it comes to workforce development, making sure that we weigh the positive and the negatives with such a policy shift.

Also, our members live in the community and including the labor's voice will help make any informed best interest for Hawaii and decision making. So, we urge you guys to pass this bill. We are in full support, but we do request for the amendment. Thank you.

Thank you. Any others?

Good morning, Chair, Co-chairs, and committee members. My name is Clifford Laboy. I'm with the Ironworkers 625 Stabilization Fund. We're here today to testify on strong support of this SB 891 SD2 with one amendment. We want to request that one of the seats on the table be represented by one of the Hawaii Building Trade Council Members.

I also hear on behalf of the trade council which has 17 unions in our folder and all 17 unions with 34,000 members are in strong support of this bill. Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you. Any others in person? Any in zoom? Members, any questions? With no questions, so we're going to take a brief recess. Thank you.

We are back from recess. Thank you for bearing with us. At this moment we are moving into decision making for bill SB 891. I have a laundry list of amendments, so bear with me. First, we're going to amend the co-chairs to allow a designee in its place both for the House and both for the Senate.

We're also going to amend the working group to look into mitigating addiction and other health hazards associated with gambling. We also amend the working group to also look into ways to mitigate financial harm associated with gambling. We also will have the working group...actually working group will have two individuals with a health and social service experience.

We also amend to add one member from Labor, one member from the Aiea Community Association, one member from the Aloha Halawa District Partners. We will also include one member from Hawaii Tourism Authority, and one more member from the Native Hawaiian Working Group. All right, members, any questions?

I have a small question. I think the idea of naming specific gaming corporations, as members is a little awkward, but just food for thought.

Any others? All right, let's -

Yeah, I second that as well.

Okay, let's, let's take a recess. Well, I can modify my recommendation, and could you bring that up?

Can I say something? I mean, you know, under the bill, item number 12, the chairpersons from the working group are allowed to appoint anyone else that has interested with experience and expertise.

I think that by naming them right now, even although it may be awkward, we're treating as transparent as we can on who is going to be there.

All right. The only thing to add to that is there's many gaming corporations and we're naming DraftKings and MGM. So that is my concern.

And you know, as I said, you know, other interested parties under item number 12 can be invited there so long as they show interest.

Representative Holt

I share the same concern as my two colleagues here on the right and would appreciate some clarifying amendments.

Let me get this straight. You're concerned about the Boyd Gaming Corporation, DraftKings Inc., and MGM Resorts International.

You know, for example, we don't name a specific labor organization. We say a member of labor, you know, and it's for it to be worked out. You know, if we specifically name them. It does not give us any leeway.

We can take out 4, 5, and 6 and just leave item 12 and make it open ended.

I have a recommended amendment. What we could do is we'll generalize this like gaming companies, and instead of naming them individually; does that work for you?

Yeah, you know, to accomplish the same goal. I think, you know, two members of the gaming community would be appropriate.

Okay.

I still have concerns. And my concern is this: I think that - I think that it would be very appropriate for the working group to invite testimony and involvement from those corporations. And in fact, it would, that that's really one of the main jobs, I think, is for the working group to sort of investigate, you know, the workings of this particular industry and how it would apply to Hawaii.

However, I think it's inappropriate for those corporations or for their designees to be part of the decision making and to be part of the authoring of the final work product of the working group.

So, for that reason, I think that they should be removed from being a component part of the working group, but they should certainly be invited to participate in the, in the working of it.

Okay, so it sounds like there are some clarifying language that needs to address these companies being mentioned. So, I will remove the mention - the Chair recommends an additional amendment, and additional amendment is going to remove the mention of Boyd Gaming Corporation, DraftKings, Inc., MGM Resorts International.

Allow a seat for three individuals from the gaming community to sit on the working group. Any questions on the recommendations?

Sorry for making this so difficult. I appreciate your help to clarify this.

Of course. All right. Vice Chair.

I'm gonna have to vote no.

Okay, that's fine.

Thank you. So, I'm sorry, this is SB 558 HD1; the Chair's recommendations to pass with amendments.

This is actually.

I'm at the wrong chair bill?

SB 891.

Thank you. Yeah. SB 891. Excuse me.

We are voting with amendments on SB 891.

Thank you. Okay. Chair votes aye; I will be voting no. [Roll Call]. Thank you very much. Chair the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you, Vice Chair. All right, meeting is now adjourned.

Wait.

Oh, forgive me. There is another committee here: Committee on Tourism.

Committee on Tourism saying recommendation; any comments, questions, or concerns? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on SB 891 with amendments. Chair votes aye, Vice Chair votes with reservations. [Roll Call]. Thank you, Chair. Your recommendations adopted.

All right, is it clear now to adjourn? All right, this meeting is now adjourned.